The brief facts are that the first respondent obtained a default judgment on 6 September 2017 after the applicant was duly barred for failing to file its plea despite that the Notice to Plead and intention to bar had been received by the clerk of the applicant who accepted service on behalf on of the applicant . More
The applicant company is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe. The respondent is an erstwhile employee of the applicant. The respondent was duly dismissed from his employ after a disciplinary inquiry. Aggrieved by this turn of events, the respondent took the matter to the Labour Office alleging an unfair labour practice. The matter was referred to arbitration. The arbitrator found in favour of the respondent and directed the parties to negotiate the quantum of damages for breach of contract. According to the applicant, the negotiations broke down and nothing was said of the matter thereafter until... More
The defendant is a cargo handling company which is in the business of handling airline cargo whereas the plaintiff is one of its customers. Most issues in this case are common cause. The undisputed facts are that on 3 March 2008 a shipment of the plaintiff arrived on board Martnair at the defendant’s premises at the Harare International Airport. The consignment comprised electrical goods and equipment valued at US$44 202-50 and was duly stored in defendant’s warehouse. More
In 2004, the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ) advanced a loan to Intermarket Holdings Limited (IHL), then a wholly owned subsidiary of the appellant. The loan was converted to equity in 2006. The RBZ thus became a 50.98 per cent shareholder in IHL. Soon thereafter, the RBZ divested its stake to the respondent without according appellant the pre-emptive rights embodied in IHL’s articles of association. The respondent thereafter assessed the appellant’s remaining stake in IHL to be equivalent to 6.21 percent of the respondent’s own issued share capital. In March 2007, the respondent offered the appellant a 6.21 percent shareholding... More
In this application the applicant seeks relief in the form of a declaratur to the effect that the Road Traffic (Construction and Equipment Use) Regulations 2010 (Statutory Instrument 154 of 2010) (“the Regulations”) and the amendments thereto are invalid, null and void or alternatively, that s 10(2) of the Regulations is ultra vires the Road Traffic Act [Cap 13:11] (“the RTA”) and therefore null and void. More
The respondent was dismissed by the appellant. In so dismissing the respondent, the appellant did not follow the provisions of the applicable code - The National Code of Conduct Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006. The respondent was aggrieved by the dismissal and the manner in which the dismissal was done. He pursued the dispute resolution system. The matter was conciliated upon without yielding the desired results. The matter was referred to arbitration. More
This is an application for stay of execution of an arbitral award handed down on 16 September 2015, in terms whereof the applicant was ordered to pay the respondents a total sum of US$6424-98 as arrear salaries. This was after the arbitrator ruled that the disciplinary proceedings that led to the respondents’ dismissal were null and void. More
Most of the facts in this case are common cause though the matter has a long history. For the sake of brevity I will detail the facts as follows. Respondents were previously employed by a company styled Mitchell Cotts Travel in Mutare. When that company closed, respondents were then employed by the appellant on new contracts. More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. At the onset the respondent employer took 2 points that the application was ill placed. This was on account of the fact that it is referred to using the wrong section of the Labour Act that is 92F(3) instead of S 92 F(2). It is also reasoned by the employee that the intended appeal grounds do not raise points of law. In response to the points the applicant conceded the ill citation and prayed that since it is in the form of typo error it be condoned and... More
The accused was convicted on his plea of guilty on two counts under the Road Traffic Act (Chapter 13:11)‘the Act’ for driving without a driver’s licence and negligent driving in contravention of s6 (1) (a) and s52 (2) of the Act respectively. On the first count he was sentenced to pay a fine of $30 000.00 in default of payment 3 months imprisonment. In addition 5 months imprisonment was wholly suspended for five years on the usual conditions. The accused was also prohibited from driving all classes of vehicles for five years. More
On 26 March 2011 the Applicant filed an application in this Court seeking the following order:
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Agreement of Sale that was entered into between the City of Masvingo and
Treasure Consultants (Private) Limited, for the sale of 500 stands in the Runyararo South West Residential area Masvingo, on 20 December 2005, (“the Agreement”) be and is hereby declared a validity existing agreement.
2. The purported existing cancellation of the Agreement by the First Respondent is void and therefore a legal nullity for want of compliance with the Law.” More
The case came before me as a civil trial. At the close of the plaintiff’s case, the defendant advised the court that it wished to make an application for absolution from the instancein terms Rule 56(6) of the High Court Rules 2021. In this respect, the defendant asked the court to allow him to make written submissions in support of the said application, resulting in the court giving the parties timelines within which to file their respective submissions. The plaintiff opposed the application for reasons I will fully canvas in this judgement. It is imperative to give a background to... More
This is an appeal against the decision of NEC Disciplinary Committee Motor Industry which was issued on the 27 June 2012. The NEC Disciplinary Committee ordered the appellant to reinstate the respondent without loss of salary and benefits.
The respondent had been charged with wilful disobedience to a lawful order by the employer. It was alleged that on the 23 July 2008 whilst the respondent was on duty he refused to carry out a lawful order that was give to him by the General Manager Operations Mr M Ralphs. It is alleged that in the hearing he admitted that he... More
On 13 November 2015 at the hearing of this application for condonation of the late noting of an appeal by the applicant employer against the respondents employees, parties agreed that judgment be reserved on the basis that it would be written out based on the heads of arguments and other documents filed of record. This therefore is the judgment in that matter. More
